Forum rules
Welcome to the forum. We know our members are passionate about their love for all things Twin Peaks. You wouldn't be here if that wasn't the case. Despite having differing viewpoints it is a policy that we all treat each other with mutual respect.

Posting abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated, or any material that may violate any laws be it of your country or the country where this forum is hosted will get you permanently banned.

Posting of spoilers are allowed as long as you indicate (Spoilers) in the topic name and use the Spoiler Tag.

Seems like she hasn't watched much of the show. I respect that her priorities are with her kids, but that's rather disappointing.

She also clearly hates Showtime, and even admits to having some issues with Lynch at one point, which I think we all sort of knew already, but interesting to see her acknowledge it openly. I imagine we'll get the real story some day.

Skip Bittman wrote:Pretty amusing to see it through a conservative filter, but then again I always figured the National Review was mainly read by liberals thinking they were broadminded enough to get the other side:

It is interesting. But isn't the writer projecting himself onto Lynch's art too? He's not denying that fact, but his interpretation of The Return is pretty definitive in his eyes. I'm quite confident Lynch did not set out to cleverly examine the insidious nature of whites among other races. Jade is an unfortunate trope, but an individual with a heart of gold. Cooper is a kind, caring person too. I'm not seeing the race angle so much. I can definitely see where he's seen it, but I'm much more inclined to align with David Foster Wallace's views of Lynch's work. That being said, it's so so so refreshing to see an article deeply examining their own perspectives on The Return, rather than re-writing Reddit theories on whatever Judy is.

Trudy Chelgren wrote:It is interesting. But isn't the writer projecting himself onto Lynch's art too? He's not denying that fact, but his interpretation of The Return is pretty definitive in his eyes. I'm quite confident Lynch did not set out to cleverly examine the insidious nature of whites among other races. Jade is an unfortunate trope, but an individual with a heart of gold. Cooper is a kind, caring person too. I'm not seeing the race angle so much. I can definitely see where he's seen it, but I'm much more inclined to align with David Foster Wallace's views of Lynch's work. That being said, it's so so so refreshing to see an article deeply examining their own perspectives on The Return, rather than re-writing Reddit theories on whatever Judy is.

Yeah, I think it has to be read in a partisan key. And, in general I think the best writing on Lynch is always partisan or personal in some way.

I've never been a super huge fan of Wallace's prose or his criticism; while there are some extremely interesting and illuminating things he says once in a while -- such as the way he defines Expressionism in film (a definition that in my view beats many others) -- his work as a whole feels dated now and very much submerged in the same kind of postmodernist irony and stylisation he was always so preoccupied with and commenting about.

Agree on how refreshing it is to read commentary that looks at the Return in a larger context vs. in-universe fan theory. I mean, each has its place but its nice to have a balance.

As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?